________________
108
A HISTORY OF THE CANONICAL LITERATURE OF THE JAINAS
identical with the ones occurring at the end of Dasaveyālīya.?
(iii) As already' noted on p. 45, Haribhadra Sūri mentions a tradition dealing with one Cūlā only.
All these factors go against Parisistaparvan. But then there arises a question as to on what basis Hemacandra Sūri gave the episode in Parisistaparvan. Was it a tradition that he narrated or had he any specific work to rely upon ? Leav this question for future investigation, I may note the following points :
(i) The 1st ajjhayana opens with the well-known sentence "e 37138 Aitan Tahari", and all its uddesas as well as those of the rest of the 1st suyakkhandha and some of the 2nd, too, end with "fa afi".
(ii) So far as I know it is not specifically mentioned as to who separated Nistha from Āyāra. Even the reason of doing so is not stated. So I may suggest that the idea of teaching only the deserving may have been the cause of separating Nistha from Ayāra. To be explicit, as already noted on p. 82, the nuns were debarred from studying Nischa, a sātisaya work; but they were permitted to study Āyāra. So, from the days the above-mentioned restriction came into force, Nistha must have got separated from Āyāra.
(iii) Ayāra (II, 1, 10, 63) has been once a matter of great controversy between the Jainas and the late Prof. Jacobi. The latter translated the words 44 and 409 by meat and fish and thereby suggested that the Jaina ascetics in olden days accepted these articles of food. He, however, expressed his revised opinion in his letter dated 14-2-28. There he has said that "TE37fgetur
1. "37137 1137 37101371 waoui 34
TTATGT afauru faalGTV 118801" This verse is looked upon by some as spurious. But it should not be forgotten that in Dasaveyaliyanijjutti, there is a reference to two Cülās. The pertinent verse is as under :
"दो अज्झयणा चूलिय विसीययंते थिरीकरणमेगं । बिइए विवित्तचरिया असीयणगुणाइरेगफला ॥२४॥" 2. This furnishes us with an example of a gama, and as such it is interpreted in 8 ways
by Malayagiri Sūri in his com. (p. 212") on Nandi, while illustrating a gama from the
stand-point of abidheya (artha), the other view-point beings abhidhāna. 3. "से भिक्खू वा जाव समाणे सिया णं परो बहुअट्ठिएणं मंसेण वा बहुकंटएण मच्छेण वा उवनिमंतिज्जा-आउसंतो
समणा ! अभिकंखसि बहुअट्ठियं मंसं बहुकंटयं मच्छं वा पडिगाहित्तए ? एयप्पगारं निग्धोसं सोच्चा निसम्म से पुव्वामेव आलोइज्जा-आउसो त्ति वा र नो खलु मे कप्पइ बहु० पडिगा०, अभिकंखसि मे दाउं जावइयं पुग्गलं
Gouf " (s. 281). 4. This original letter is in my possession and has been printed in my article Prohibition
of Flesh-eating in Jainism published in "The Review of Philosophy and Religion" (vol. IV, No. 2).
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
